How to Make 1:1s More Effective for Managers
From status updates to meaningful conversations
Regular one-to-ones are one of the most powerful tools a manager has. When they work well, they improve engagement, support performance and help people grow. When they do not, they become a recurring meeting that neither person looks forward to. This guide sets out what makes 1:1s genuinely effective, why so many default to task check-ins, and what to do differently.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Why most 1:1s are less useful than they could be
A one-to-one should be a focused conversation between a manager and a team member. In practice, many become informal catch-ups about workload, deadlines and ongoing issues. The conversation stays at the surface because that is where the pressure is.
This is not a motivation problem. It is a training problem. Research from the Chartered Management Institute (CMI, 2023) found that 82% of managers step into their roles without any formal management training. Without a clear framework for what a 1:1 is actually for, it defaults to whatever feels most urgent, which is usually operational.
The result is that the conversations with the most potential, about development, strengths, wellbeing and longer-term goals, rarely happen. According to CIPD's Good Work Index, one in three employees say their manager never or rarely discusses their development with them. The meeting happens, but the conversation people most need is missing.
What a good 1:1 actually does
A well-structured one-to-one serves three purposes that a team meeting or email cannot. It creates a private space for honest conversation. It allows a manager to see what is happening for someone individually, rather than as part of a group. And it builds the kind of relationship where performance issues, development needs and wellbeing concerns can be addressed before they become problems.
Gallup research consistently shows that managers who hold regular, meaningful one-to-ones with their team members see significantly higher engagement. The frequency and quality of those conversations is one of the strongest predictors of how connected someone feels to their work and to the organisation.
In the public sector, where workloads are high and resources stretched, the temptation is to skip or shorten 1:1s when things get busy. This is usually when they matter most. Strengthify's Public Sector Engagement Insights Report (2025) found that manager support has a strong positive correlation (0.55) with employee engagement. The relationship is not a nice-to-have. It is structural.
The five things that make a 1:1 work
1. It belongs to the team member, not the manager
The most common error in 1:1s is the manager leading the agenda. When the manager sets the questions and drives the direction, the conversation tends to cover what the manager already knows they need to check on, not what the team member most needs to talk about.
Effective one-to-ones are structured around the team member's agenda. This does not mean the manager has no role. It means the manager creates the conditions for an honest conversation, listens more than they talk, and responds to what they hear.
A simple shift is to ask the team member to send two or three topics before the meeting. This moves the conversation from reactive to intentional before it starts.
2. It includes development, not just delivery
If a 1:1 only covers what is on the to-do list, it is not serving its full purpose. Delivery matters, but so does how someone is growing, what they find energising, what they find hard, and where they want to go.
Incorporating strengths into one-to-ones is one of the most practical ways to shift this. When a manager understands what a team member is genuinely good at and what conditions help them perform, the conversation becomes more useful for both people. The team member feels seen, and the manager has better information to make decisions about how work is allocated and developed.
Strengthify's own data shows this effect clearly. Across 170 managers who completed the Management Development Programme, 98% said they felt better equipped to explore strengths within their team, and 88% felt more confident approaching performance conversations. These are not separate outcomes: when managers understand strengths, performance conversations become less difficult because they are grounded in something constructive.
3. It follows a consistent structure without being rigid
A structure is useful because it removes the cognitive load of working out what to cover each time. It also creates a rhythm that both people can prepare for.
A straightforward structure for a 30 to 45 minute one-to-one:
- Check in briefly on how the person is doing (5 minutes)
- Work through the team member's two or three agenda items (15 to 20 minutes)
- Discussion of development, strengths or longer-term goals (10 minutes)
- Agreed actions and any follow-up from the manager (5 minutes)
The structure should be a container, not a script. The conversation will go where it needs to go. What matters is that development is built in by default, not left until there is time.
4. It creates psychological safety
People will not share what is actually going on if they do not feel safe doing so. This is particularly relevant in higher education and health and social care, where team members are often managing high workloads, uncertainty and professional pressure. A 1:1 that feels like a performance review in miniature is not going to surface the conversations that matter.
Safety is built over time through how a manager responds when someone raises something difficult. Responding with curiosity rather than problem-solving, acknowledging what someone has shared before moving to action, and following through on things discussed in previous meetings all build the kind of trust that makes a 1:1 genuinely useful.
The NHS Staff Survey consistently shows that approximately 73% of staff feel their manager encourages and values their work. That positive foundation exists. The development opportunity is in converting that goodwill into conversations that help people grow, not just cope.
5. It follows through
A 1:1 is only as useful as what happens between sessions. If actions are agreed and nothing moves, the meeting loses credibility quickly. The team member learns that raising things leads to nothing.
A brief note of what was agreed, sent immediately after the meeting, takes two minutes and creates accountability for both people. Over time, the pattern of following through signals that the conversation matters and that the manager is paying attention.
What does not work in isolation
One-to-ones are sometimes introduced as a standalone initiative without broader support for managers. A calendar invite is not a framework. Without a clear understanding of what the conversation is for, and some practical development around skills like active listening, strengths-based questioning and giving constructive feedback, 1:1s can become a source of anxiety for both parties rather than a resource.
Structural fixes, such as templates or conversation guides, are useful but they are not sufficient on their own. The mindset shift, from checking in to genuinely developing someone, requires practice and support. This is why the most effective organisations embed 1:1 skills within broader management development rather than treating them as a separate training item.
How strengths change the quality of the conversation
A recurring challenge managers face in 1:1s is knowing how to make the conversation feel meaningful rather than transactional. Strengths provide a practical lens for doing this.
When a manager can identify what someone is genuinely energised by, and connect that to how their work is structured and what opportunities are available, the conversation shifts from review to development. The team member is not just being assessed. They are being understood.
This also changes how performance issues are approached. Rather than focusing on what is not working, a strengths-based manager asks what conditions would help this person do their best work, and what might be getting in the way. The question is different, and so is the conversation it opens.
Managers who develop this approach consistently report that one-to-ones become easier over time. They are no longer a meeting to get through. They become the place where the most useful work happens.
Frequently Asked Questions
For most managers, fortnightly is the practical minimum. Weekly is better where team members are newer, in more complex roles, or going through a difficult period. Monthly is generally too infrequent to build the continuity that makes 1:1s effective. What matters more than frequency is consistency. A fortnightly one-to-one that always happens is more valuable than a weekly one that keeps being moved.
How Strengthify can help
Strengthify works with managers and leaders in higher education, the NHS and the wider public sector to develop the skills and confidence that make one-to-ones genuinely effective. Our Management Development Programme helps managers across seven core areas, including performance conversations, supporting open communication and investing in people development. Across 170 programme participants, 91% reported feeling more confident in their management skills.
If you would like to explore how a strengths-based approach to management development could work for your organisation, we would be glad to hear from you.
Related guides
This guide draws on findings from Strengthify's Public Sector Engagement Insights Report 2025. Read the full report.